Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Caught in a trap: DNA contamination in tsetse xenomonitoring can lead to over-estimates of Trypanosoma brucei infection

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Tsetse flies ( Glossina sp.) are vectors of Trypanosoma brucei subspecies that cause human African trypanosomiasis (HAT). Capturing and screening tsetse is critical for HAT surveillance. Classically, tsetse have been microscopically analysed to identify trypanosomes, but this is increasingly replaced with molecular xenomonitoring. Nonetheless, sensitive T. brucei-detection assays, such as TBR-PCR, are vulnerable to DNA cross-contamination. This may occur at capture, when often multiple live tsetse are retained temporarily in the cage of a trap. This study set out to determine whether infected tsetse can contaminate naïve tsetse with T. brucei DNA via faeces when co-housed.

          Methodology/Principle findings

          Insectary-reared teneral G. morsitans morsitans were fed an infectious T. b. brucei-spiked bloodmeal. At 19 days post-infection, infected and naïve tsetse were caged together in the following ratios: (T1) 9:3, (T2) 6:6 (T3) 1:11 and a control (C0) 0:12 in triplicate. Following 24-hour incubation, DNA was extracted from each fly and screened for parasite DNA presence using PCR and qPCR. All insectary-reared infected flies were positive for T. brucei DNA using TBR-qPCR. However, naïve tsetse also tested positive. Even at a ratio of 1 infected to 11 naïve flies, 91% of naïve tsetse gave positive TBR-qPCR results. Furthermore, the quantity of T. brucei DNA detected in naïve tsetse was significantly correlated with cage infection ratio. With evidence of cross-contamination, field-caught tsetse from Tanzania were then assessed using the same screening protocol. End-point TBR-PCR predicted a sample population prevalence of 24.8%. Using qPCR and Cq cut-offs optimised on insectary-reared flies, we estimated that prevalence was 0.5% (95% confidence interval [0.36, 0.73]).

          Conclusions/Significance

          Our results show that infected tsetse can contaminate naïve flies with T. brucei DNA when co-caged, and that the level of contamination can be extensive. Whilst simple PCR may overestimate infection prevalence, quantitative PCR offers a means of eliminating false positives.

          Author summary

          Tsetse flies ( Glossina sp.) are vectors of Trypanosoma brucei parasites that cause human African trypanosomiasis, also known as sleeping sickness. As part of disease surveillance, tsetse can be captured in traps and checked for parasite presence. The molecular screening of disease vectors (such as mosquitoes, ticks and blackflies) for the presence of pathogen DNA has gained popularity in recent years. However, DNA contamination may occur at capture when live vectors are retained for a limited period in a trap cage. To explore this, we conducted experiments, initially with laboratory-reared tsetse and then field-caught tsetse from Tanzania. Our results show that infected tsetse can contaminate uninfected tsetse with T. brucei DNA when retained together in a trap cage, and that the level of contamination can be extensive. Infected tsetse consistently shed T. brucei DNA in their faeces, which in turn contaminates other tsetse. This can produce false-positive results, leading to inaccurate reporting of infection prevalence. These findings impact not only trypanosomiasis surveillance, but may also have ramifications for the xenomonitoring of other vector-borne neglected diseases. Future work should explore whether pathogen DNA contamination routes exist in other vector species and, if so, the methods to mitigate DNA contamination in entomological traps.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Conference Proceedings: not found

          BioEdit: a user-friendly biological sequence alignment editor and analysis program for windows 95/98/ NT/7.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Detection of Trypanosoma congolense and Trypanosoma brucei subspecies by DNA amplification using the polymerase chain reaction.

            The nuclear DNA of Trypanosoma congolense contains a family of highly conserved 369 base pair (bp) repeats. The sequences of three cloned copies of these repeats were determined. An unrelated family of 177 bp repeats has previously been shown to occur in the nuclear DNA of Trypanosoma brucei brucei (Sloof et al. 1983a). Oligonucleotides were synthesized which prime the specific amplification of each of these repetitive DNAs by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Amplification of 10% of the DNA in a single parasite of T. congolense or T. brucei spp. produced sufficient amplified product to be visible as a band in an agarose gel stained with ethidium bromide. This level of detection, which does not depend on the use of radioactivity, is about 100 times more sensitive than previous detection methods based on radioactive DNA probes. The oligonucleotides did not prime the amplification of DNA sequences in other trypanosome species nor in Leishmania, mouse or human DNAs. Amplification of DNA from the blood of animals infected with T. congolense and/or T. brucei spp. permitted the identification of parasite levels far below that detectable by microscopic inspection. Since PCR amplification can be conducted on a large number of samples simultaneously, it is ideally suited for large-scale studies on the prevalence of African trypanosomes in both mammalian blood and insect vectors.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              False-positive results and contamination in nucleic acid amplification assays: suggestions for a prevent and destroy strategy.

              Contamination of samples with DNA is still a major problem in microbiology laboratories, despite the wide acceptance of PCR and other amplification techniques for the detection of frequently low amounts of target DNA. This review focuses on the implications of contamination in the diagnosis and research of infectious diseases, possible sources of contaminants, strategies for prevention and destruction, and quality control. Contamination of samples in diagnostic PCR can have far-reaching consequences for patients, as illustrated by several examples in this review. Furthermore, it appears that the (sometimes very unexpected) sources of contaminants are diverse (including water, reagents, disposables, sample carry over, and amplicon), and contaminants can also be introduced by unrelated activities in neighboring laboratories. Therefore, lack of communication between researchers using the same laboratory space can be considered a risk factor. Only a very limited number of multicenter quality control studies have been published so far, but these showed false-positive rates of 9-57%. The overall conclusion is that although nucleic acid amplification assays are basically useful both in research and in the clinic, their accuracy depends on awareness of risk factors and the proper use of procedures for the prevention of nucleic acid contamination. The discussion of prevention and destruction strategies included in this review may serve as a guide to help improve laboratory practices and reduce the number of false-positive amplification results.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Investigation
                Role: Data curationRole: Investigation
                Role: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: Project administration
                Role: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Project administration
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: Project administration
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS Negl Trop Dis
                PLoS Negl Trop Dis
                plos
                PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1935-2727
                1935-2735
                12 August 2024
                August 2024
                : 18
                : 8
                : e0012095
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
                [2 ] Vector and Vector-borne Diseases Research Institute, Tanga, Tanzania
                [3 ] Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, United States of America
                [4 ] School of Biodiversity, One Health & Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
                [5 ] School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom
                [6 ] The Roslin Institute, Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
                [7 ] Department of Tropical Disease Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom
                Agricultural Research Council Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute: Agricultural Research Council Onderstepoort Veterinary Research, SOUTH AFRICA
                Author notes

                The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4141-8625
                Article
                PNTD-D-24-00424
                10.1371/journal.pntd.0012095
                11341098
                39133740
                3dcfc490-43de-4715-a2ff-aa38b328df08
                © 2024 Saldanha et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 22 March 2024
                : 26 July 2024
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 3, Pages: 23
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000268, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council;
                Award ID: BB/S01375X/1
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000865, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation;
                Award ID: INV-031337
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000865, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation;
                Award ID: INV-001785
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000865, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation;
                Award ID: INV-046509
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000268, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council;
                Award ID: BBS/E/D/20002173
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000268, Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council;
                Award ID: BBS/E/RL/230002C
                Funding was provided by Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC; BB/S01375X/1 (to HA, JSL, LJM, FM, SJT); www.ukri.org/councils/bbsrc/) and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (INV-031337, INV-001785, INV-046509 (to SJT); www.gatesfoundation.org/). The Roslin Institute is supported by core funding from the BBSRC (BBS/E/D/20002173, BBS/E/RL/230002C; www.ukri.org/councils/bbsrc/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Protozoans
                Parasitic Protozoans
                Trypanosoma
                Trypanosoma Brucei
                Trypanosoma Brucei Gambiense
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Protozoans
                Parasitic Protozoans
                Trypanosoma
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Parasitic Diseases
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Molecular Biology
                Molecular Biology Techniques
                Artificial Gene Amplification and Extension
                Polymerase Chain Reaction
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Molecular Biology Techniques
                Artificial Gene Amplification and Extension
                Polymerase Chain Reaction
                Research and analysis methods
                Extraction techniques
                DNA extraction
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Protozoans
                Parasitic Protozoans
                Trypanosoma
                Trypanosoma Brucei
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Zoology
                Entomology
                Insects
                Glossina
                Tsetse Fly
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Glossina
                Tsetse Fly
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Zoology
                Animals
                Invertebrates
                Arthropoda
                Insects
                Glossina
                Tsetse Fly
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Disease Vectors
                Insect Vectors
                Tsetse Fly
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Species Interactions
                Disease Vectors
                Insect Vectors
                Tsetse Fly
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Physiology
                Physiological Processes
                Excretion
                Custom metadata
                vor-update-to-uncorrected-proof
                2024-08-22
                All data generated during this project is available at DOIs https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25298644.v1 and https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.25298689.v1.

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article